Cargando…

Implementation of structured reporting in clinical routine: a review of 7 years of institutional experience

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the implementation process of structured reporting (SR) in a tertiary care institution over a period of 7 years. METHODS: We analysed the content of our image database from January 2016 to December 2022 and compared the numbers of structured reports and free-text reports. For...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jorg, Tobias, Halfmann, Moritz C., Arnhold, Gordon, Pinto dos Santos, Daniel, Kloeckner, Roman, Düber, Christoph, Mildenberger, Peter, Jungmann, Florian, Müller, Lukas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Vienna 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10086081/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37037963
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-023-01408-7
_version_ 1785022068972060672
author Jorg, Tobias
Halfmann, Moritz C.
Arnhold, Gordon
Pinto dos Santos, Daniel
Kloeckner, Roman
Düber, Christoph
Mildenberger, Peter
Jungmann, Florian
Müller, Lukas
author_facet Jorg, Tobias
Halfmann, Moritz C.
Arnhold, Gordon
Pinto dos Santos, Daniel
Kloeckner, Roman
Düber, Christoph
Mildenberger, Peter
Jungmann, Florian
Müller, Lukas
author_sort Jorg, Tobias
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To evaluate the implementation process of structured reporting (SR) in a tertiary care institution over a period of 7 years. METHODS: We analysed the content of our image database from January 2016 to December 2022 and compared the numbers of structured reports and free-text reports. For the ten most common SR templates, usage proportions were calculated on a quarterly basis. Annual modality-specific SR usage was calculated for ultrasound, CT, and MRI. During the implementation process, we surveyed radiologists and clinical referring physicians concerning their views on reporting in radiology. RESULTS: As of December 2022, our reporting platform contained more than 22,000 structured reports. Use of the ten most common SR templates increased markedly since their implementation, leading to a mean SR usage of 77% in Q4 2022. The highest percentages of SR usage were shown for trauma CT, focussed assessment with ultrasound for trauma (FAST), and prostate MRI: 97%, 95%, and 92%, respectively, in 2022. Overall modality-specific SR usage was 17% for ultrasound, 13% for CT, and 6% for MRI in 2022. Both radiologists and referring physicians were more satisfied with structured reports and rated SR better than free-text reporting (FTR) on various attributes. CONCLUSIONS: The increasing SR usage during the period under review and the positive attitude towards SR among both radiologists and clinical referrers show that SR can be successfully implemented. We therefore encourage others to take this step in order to benefit from the advantages of SR. KEY POINTS: 1. Structured reporting usage increased markedly since its implementation at our institution in 2016. 2. Mean usage for the ten most popular structured reporting templates was 77% in 2022. 3. Both radiologists and referring physicians preferred structured reports over free-text reports. 4. Our data shows that structured reporting can be successfully implemented. 5. We strongly encourage others to implement structured reporting at their institutions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10086081
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Vienna
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100860812023-04-12 Implementation of structured reporting in clinical routine: a review of 7 years of institutional experience Jorg, Tobias Halfmann, Moritz C. Arnhold, Gordon Pinto dos Santos, Daniel Kloeckner, Roman Düber, Christoph Mildenberger, Peter Jungmann, Florian Müller, Lukas Insights Imaging Original Article BACKGROUND: To evaluate the implementation process of structured reporting (SR) in a tertiary care institution over a period of 7 years. METHODS: We analysed the content of our image database from January 2016 to December 2022 and compared the numbers of structured reports and free-text reports. For the ten most common SR templates, usage proportions were calculated on a quarterly basis. Annual modality-specific SR usage was calculated for ultrasound, CT, and MRI. During the implementation process, we surveyed radiologists and clinical referring physicians concerning their views on reporting in radiology. RESULTS: As of December 2022, our reporting platform contained more than 22,000 structured reports. Use of the ten most common SR templates increased markedly since their implementation, leading to a mean SR usage of 77% in Q4 2022. The highest percentages of SR usage were shown for trauma CT, focussed assessment with ultrasound for trauma (FAST), and prostate MRI: 97%, 95%, and 92%, respectively, in 2022. Overall modality-specific SR usage was 17% for ultrasound, 13% for CT, and 6% for MRI in 2022. Both radiologists and referring physicians were more satisfied with structured reports and rated SR better than free-text reporting (FTR) on various attributes. CONCLUSIONS: The increasing SR usage during the period under review and the positive attitude towards SR among both radiologists and clinical referrers show that SR can be successfully implemented. We therefore encourage others to take this step in order to benefit from the advantages of SR. KEY POINTS: 1. Structured reporting usage increased markedly since its implementation at our institution in 2016. 2. Mean usage for the ten most popular structured reporting templates was 77% in 2022. 3. Both radiologists and referring physicians preferred structured reports over free-text reports. 4. Our data shows that structured reporting can be successfully implemented. 5. We strongly encourage others to implement structured reporting at their institutions. Springer Vienna 2023-04-11 /pmc/articles/PMC10086081/ /pubmed/37037963 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-023-01408-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Jorg, Tobias
Halfmann, Moritz C.
Arnhold, Gordon
Pinto dos Santos, Daniel
Kloeckner, Roman
Düber, Christoph
Mildenberger, Peter
Jungmann, Florian
Müller, Lukas
Implementation of structured reporting in clinical routine: a review of 7 years of institutional experience
title Implementation of structured reporting in clinical routine: a review of 7 years of institutional experience
title_full Implementation of structured reporting in clinical routine: a review of 7 years of institutional experience
title_fullStr Implementation of structured reporting in clinical routine: a review of 7 years of institutional experience
title_full_unstemmed Implementation of structured reporting in clinical routine: a review of 7 years of institutional experience
title_short Implementation of structured reporting in clinical routine: a review of 7 years of institutional experience
title_sort implementation of structured reporting in clinical routine: a review of 7 years of institutional experience
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10086081/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37037963
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-023-01408-7
work_keys_str_mv AT jorgtobias implementationofstructuredreportinginclinicalroutineareviewof7yearsofinstitutionalexperience
AT halfmannmoritzc implementationofstructuredreportinginclinicalroutineareviewof7yearsofinstitutionalexperience
AT arnholdgordon implementationofstructuredreportinginclinicalroutineareviewof7yearsofinstitutionalexperience
AT pintodossantosdaniel implementationofstructuredreportinginclinicalroutineareviewof7yearsofinstitutionalexperience
AT kloecknerroman implementationofstructuredreportinginclinicalroutineareviewof7yearsofinstitutionalexperience
AT duberchristoph implementationofstructuredreportinginclinicalroutineareviewof7yearsofinstitutionalexperience
AT mildenbergerpeter implementationofstructuredreportinginclinicalroutineareviewof7yearsofinstitutionalexperience
AT jungmannflorian implementationofstructuredreportinginclinicalroutineareviewof7yearsofinstitutionalexperience
AT mullerlukas implementationofstructuredreportinginclinicalroutineareviewof7yearsofinstitutionalexperience